Saltar al contenido

Dónde en vez de qué…

  • por

El último número de la revista Science pone el dedo en la llaga de la actual situación de las publicaciones científicas, primero con una carta muy reveladora:

Painful Publishing

One problem with the current publication process arises from the overwhelming importance given to papers published in high-impact journals such as Science. Sadly, career advancement can depend more on where you publish than what you publish. Consequently, authors are so keen to publish in these select journals that they are willing to carry out extra, time-consuming experiments suggested by referees, even when the results could strengthen the conclusions only marginally. All too often, young scientists spend many months doing such «referees’experiments.» Their time and effort would frequently be better spent trying to move their project forward rather than sideways. There is also an inherent danger in doing experiments to obtain results that a referee demands to see. Although we emphasize these problems with regard to the highest-impact journals, the same problems occur with other journals.

It is surprising that so many referees make unnecessary demands, as they are authors themselves and know how it feels when the situation is reversed. Such demands are discouraging for young scientists and, cumulatively, slow the progress of science. Of course, peer review is critical for making sure that the authors’ conclusions are sound, and some referees’ experiments would substantially advance the story. But frequently, these would justify an additional paper. Science advances in stages, and no story is complete.

Puntos de vista que es respaldado en parte por el editor de Science cuando revisa el estado de las revisiones de los artículos científicos:

But peer review is under increasing stress, in ways that are perhaps
not fully appreciated. The growth of scientific publishing is placing a
burden on the entire scientific enterprise. Papers today are more
interdisciplinary, use more techniques, and have more authors. Many
have large volumes of data and supplementary material. To compound the
problem, papers are often being reviewed multiple times. Most of those
rejected by Science go on to be considered at other journals,
where the rejection rates have also increased. Before finding a proper
venue, a paper may have received four, six, or even eight reviews. So
even if the journal that finally publishes the article responds
rapidly, the process is often painful and prolonged.

The responsibility for addressing this growing inefficiency is shared.
Scientists can help by selecting the appropriate journal for their
work, and seeking critical input from colleagues and all coauthors,
before submitting an article for publication. Senior scientists should
also mentor their students and postdoctoral fellows in good reviewing
practices, enlarging the pool of qualified referees.*
The possibility of repurposing reviews among journals, already
practiced by some groups of journals with a single publisher, should be
considered seriously. We note a recent experiment in which some
independent neuroscience journals have agreed to share reviews.

Revelador…

Deja una respuesta

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *

Información básica sobre protección de datos Ver más

  • Responsable: Eusebio Perdiguero.
  • Finalidad:  Moderar los comentarios.
  • Legitimación:  Por consentimiento del interesado.
  • Destinatarios y encargados de tratamiento:  No se ceden o comunican datos a terceros para prestar este servicio.
  • Derechos: Acceder, rectificar y suprimir los datos.
  • Información Adicional: Puede consultar la información detallada en la Política de Privacidad.

Esta web utiliza cookies propias para su correcto funcionamiento. Contiene enlaces a sitios web de terceros con políticas de privacidad ajenas que podrás aceptar o no cuando accedas a ellos. Al hacer clic en el botón Aceptar, acepta el uso de estas tecnologías y el procesamiento de tus datos para estos propósitos. Más información
Privacidad